Jump to content

Photo

2013 NHL Draft


  • Please log in to reply
1242 replies to this topic

#461 SterioDesign

SterioDesign

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,992 posts

Posted 30 May 2013 - 09:48 AM

I care about the team having good young players.  I don't care about 'prospect pools' - you cited that the Devils aren't 'ranked highly' in prospect lists.  Name a team with a better stable of D men drafted 2009 or later:  Gelinas, Urbom, Gedig, Merrill, Larsson, Scarlett, Severson.  

 

More what I'm getting at is that prospect lists are stupid (I just went to hockeysfuture and laughed my face off at how dumb some of their picks are).  Obviously the Devils should want good young players - they have those.  They have enough to make some sort of Kovalchuk type trade if they want to.  It looks like a very strong future on defense.

 

having good young players means having a good prospects pool, where do you think they come from ? lol if that was just a play on words just to get me going well thats pretty useless, yet once again you took LITERALLY what i said and not what the whole thing really meant . Do i have to say... "The devils doesnt have young potential top 6 offensive players except boucher, compared to most teams in the league?" Or "most teams have one or a few studs coming their way they are just waiting for him/them to be "Ready".

 

i mean its not rocket science, its not that black and white either but if some teams have a better / younger NHL team than NJ at this moment, and that they have studs coming their way. It's only looking bright for the future. We don't have that, our future is so damn uncertain its scary. Most of our top players are old and near retirement and theres no one to cover for them in our prospect pool. And where we actually have depth is at D and for some reasons they are not giving the kid their chances but stack the NHL with some horrible overpaid veterans.


Edited by SterioDesign, 30 May 2013 - 09:49 AM.

  • 0

www.SterioDesign.com

 


#462 Daniel

Daniel

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,441 posts

Posted 30 May 2013 - 10:30 AM

having good young players means having a good prospects pool, where do you think they come from ? lol if that was just a play on words just to get me going well thats pretty useless, yet once again you took LITERALLY what i said and not what the whole thing really meant . Do i have to say... "The devils doesnt have young potential top 6 offensive players except boucher, compared to most teams in the league?" Or "most teams have one or a few studs coming their way they are just waiting for him/them to be "Ready".

i mean its not rocket science, its not that black and white either but if some teams have a better / younger NHL team than NJ at this moment, and that they have studs coming their way. It's only looking bright for the future. We don't have that, our future is so damn uncertain its scary. Most of our top players are old and near retirement and theres no one to cover for them in our prospect pool. And where we actually have depth is at D and for some reasons they are not giving the kid their chances but stack the NHL with some horrible overpaid veterans.



First off, while I enjoy reading the HF individual prospect analyses, their team rankings seem to be a bit odd. They rank the Rangers pretty high, but if you look at their individual grades, I think the Devils ought to rank higher if you're just looking at the sum of the parts. So ultimately, as Tri noted, you can't really put any stock in superficial team rankings.

Otherwise, we get it, we'd all love to have young dynamic players. Unfortunately, more often than not, you have to stink for a while. The Kings had a lot of lean years, which helped them land Kopitar, Brayden Schenn (who turned into Richards), Jack Johnson (who turned into Carter), Doughty, and Dustin Brown. The Hawks were so awful at one point that their attendance was among the worst in the league. And we all know that the Penguins are the "lucky sperm club" of hocky teams.

But still, there's no magical formula. If being a young talented team is the key, Edmonton should at least be a playoff team. They actually haven't drafted any busts that I can think of with their high draft picks, yet they still stink. If the Devils all the sudden started a youth movement, and went down in the dumps, which would be more likely than not, you'd be saying more veteran leadership is required.

All in all, I would say the Devils' future is uncertain -- not bright, but not bleak either. Their defense is old on the whole, and has some weak links, but it's good enough that you can ease in the young defensemen over time. And, for all the belly aching, the Devils are still good defensively, whether you want to measure it by shots against or goals against.

At forward, I think you have at least five more years of Kovalchuk playing at a high level. Physically, he's a freak of nature, and doesn't have any of those debilitating nagging injuries that I know of. Zajac should be good for a while. Elias is old, but so are Datsyuk and Chara, just to name a few. If they hit the open market today, they'd get at least four year deals at $7million per year. Let me put it this way, who do you think is going to be better over the next three to four years, Elias or Courturier (or Zbenjiad, Strome, Yakupov, Granlund, Kreider, or any of those other players that are in the Hockey's Future top fifteen prospects)? If you knew the NHL were going to disband in five years, you would take Elias over ANYONE currently on one of those top prospect lists. Otherwise, there are enough depth type forwards of varying quality which can help the Devils at least tread water for the next few years.

In goal, it is what it is. I still maintain though that Marty was good enough when he wasn't hurt this year, and you can pick up another "good enough" type goalie with a little bit of luck.

Yes, it would be great to have a couple of forwards on the Hockey Future's top 50 list, regardless of how accurate you think those rankings and assessments are. And hopefully whoever we draft this year, will immediately be on that list. It just isn't necessary or sufficient to be a good team in the short, medium or even long term.

Sterio, I like you, but at times you sound like this teacher I had in high school who was also the swim team coach. He always noted that being the swim team coach was the easiest job in the world. All he did was sit there and say "swim faster". That's sort of what most sports fans are like.

Edited by Daniel, 30 May 2013 - 10:46 AM.

  • 1
Posted Image
I collect spores, molds and fungus.
Hello fellow American. This you should vote me. I leave power. Good. Thank you, thank you. If you vote me, I'm hot. What? Taxes, they'll be lower... son. The Democratic vote is the right thing to do Philadelphia, so do.
How do you spot risk? How do you avoid risk? And what makes it so risky?

#463 Daniel

Daniel

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,441 posts

Posted 30 May 2013 - 10:48 AM

I'll also note another weird thing about the HF Top 50 prospect list is where they rank Merrill.  If you look at his individual assessment, they project him to be Ryan Suter, yet he's something like #50 if I recall correctly.  Seems like one hand doesn't know what the other is doing.


  • 0
Posted Image
I collect spores, molds and fungus.
Hello fellow American. This you should vote me. I leave power. Good. Thank you, thank you. If you vote me, I'm hot. What? Taxes, they'll be lower... son. The Democratic vote is the right thing to do Philadelphia, so do.
How do you spot risk? How do you avoid risk? And what makes it so risky?

#464 Triumph

Triumph

    A Legend

  • Mod
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 28,736 posts

Posted 30 May 2013 - 10:54 AM

Daniel pretty much sums it up, and he's been on both sides of this debate.  Yeah, there's no one to replace Elias.  What kind of a system would just have another Elias waiting?   If Loktionov is as good as I think he might be, you've got a good center base.  

 

And what's even bigger than prospect development is how you treat them at the NHL level - Montreal's been fantastic at drafting over the last 6 or 7 years but have given away so much talent.  The Devils don't typically give away talent and hopefully that continues to be the case.

 

HF is a joke, Daniel.  They said 'Jack Campbell's season in the AHL really shows he's a good prospect' - wow a .905 save percentage.  Absolutely nothing besides his draft pedigree indicates he's a good prospect.  And they do this all the time - they rate on skill sets, they don't understand aging curves, they don't understand what scoring in one league means in relation to scoring in another, etc.


Edited by Triumph, 30 May 2013 - 10:55 AM.

  • 0

http://drivingplay.blogspot.com - The blog with three first lines
 


#465 SMantzas

SMantzas

    Head Coach

  • Mod
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,101 posts

Posted 30 May 2013 - 11:11 AM

Sterio- disregard prospect pools for a second and look what NJ has

C-

Zajac (27): Very good two way center who should be good for 50 pts while taking on the oppositions best

Loktionov (23): Extremely talented, shifty playmaker with good hands and a sneaky shot. He can eat up soft minutes with Kovy

Josefson (22): Another two way center who can also take on toughs

On D you have Larsson, Merrill, Severson, Gelinas, Urbom, Scarlett who are all under 22 and except for Scarlett are all over 6 '2. That's gonna be a big and mobile defense in the future.

Wingers are dicey but Matteau, Pietila and Boucher look to all have a chance to stick in the league. Adding Shinkaruk and Hartman (or something like that) would do wonders.

Goaltending doesn't matter as much. Maybe Wedgewood or Kinky will pan out, but you can always sign a guy like Fasth out of Europe. With a strong D that we seem to have, the position isn't that important.

If you look at all that and add Henrique and Fayne into the mix, NJ has a lot of good young talent. Probably the best since I've been a die hard (1999)
  • 0

#466 Daniel

Daniel

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,441 posts

Posted 30 May 2013 - 11:12 AM

HF is a joke, Daniel.  They said 'Jack Campbell's season in the AHL really shows he's a good prospect' - wow a .905 save percentage.  Absolutely nothing besides his draft pedigree indicates he's a good prospect.  And they do this all the time - they rate on skill sets, they don't understand aging curves, they don't understand what scoring in one league means in relation to scoring in another, etc.

 

I don't know the extent to which the same principle applies to goalies, but my understanding is that stats at the AHL level are not a great indicator of NHL potential.  Parise in his AHL year didn't light it up offensively. 

 

With Campbell specifically, I obviously have not seen him play, so I can't speak to any skil set, or whether there's more to his game than his save percentage suggests (and as we all know, I'm not in love with save percentage anyway).  If you look at his individual analysis, they project him to be an 8, which HF defines as a number 1 goalie. There are 30 of them in any given year, so if anything, you should fault HF for being vague about things.  You also can't throw out draft pedigree so quickly. 

 

Otherwise, HF seems to be getting better with their individual player assessments in that they're a bit more realistic these days.  Really, they're the only game in town when it comes to significant analysis (accurate or otherwise) of prospects.


  • 0
Posted Image
I collect spores, molds and fungus.
Hello fellow American. This you should vote me. I leave power. Good. Thank you, thank you. If you vote me, I'm hot. What? Taxes, they'll be lower... son. The Democratic vote is the right thing to do Philadelphia, so do.
How do you spot risk? How do you avoid risk? And what makes it so risky?

#467 Daniel

Daniel

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,441 posts

Posted 30 May 2013 - 11:17 AM

Sterio- disregard prospect pools for a second and look what NJ has

C-

Zajac (27): Very good two way center who should be good for 50 pts while taking on the oppositions best

Loktionov (23): Extremely talented, shifty playmaker with good hands and a sneaky shot. He can eat up soft minutes with Kovy

Josefson (22): Another two way center who can also take on toughs

On D you have Larsson, Merrill, Severson, Gelinas, Urbom, Scarlett who are all under 22 and except for Scarlett are all over 6 '2. That's gonna be a big and mobile defense in the future.

Wingers are dicey but Matteau, Pietila and Boucher look to all have a chance to stick in the league. Adding Shinkaruk and Hartman (or something like that) would do wonders.

Goaltending doesn't matter as much. Maybe Wedgewood or Kinky will pan out, but you can always sign a guy like Fasth out of Europe. With a strong D that we seem to have, the position isn't that important.

If you look at all that and add Henrique and Fayne into the mix, NJ has a lot of good young talent. Probably the best since I've been a die hard (1999)

 

On D, you can't really count on anyone other than Larsson and Merrill to be above-average NHL defensemen any time soon, or more precisely better in the long term than any of the other defensemen that are currently on the roster.  In other words, if you consider Andy Greene to be currently the best defenseman on the roster, only Larsson and Merrill have a decent to good shot at being better than him in the medium to long term.

 

Don't get me wrong, I like the other guys, especially Severson.  They're just not shoo-in improvements over what is currently there.


  • 0
Posted Image
I collect spores, molds and fungus.
Hello fellow American. This you should vote me. I leave power. Good. Thank you, thank you. If you vote me, I'm hot. What? Taxes, they'll be lower... son. The Democratic vote is the right thing to do Philadelphia, so do.
How do you spot risk? How do you avoid risk? And what makes it so risky?

#468 SterioDesign

SterioDesign

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,992 posts

Posted 30 May 2013 - 11:52 AM

Sterio- disregard prospect pools for a second and look what NJ has

C-

Zajac (27): Very good two way center who should be good for 50 pts while taking on the oppositions best

Loktionov (23): Extremely talented, shifty playmaker with good hands and a sneaky shot. He can eat up soft minutes with Kovy

Josefson (22): Another two way center who can also take on toughs

On D you have Larsson, Merrill, Severson, Gelinas, Urbom, Scarlett who are all under 22 and except for Scarlett are all over 6 '2. That's gonna be a big and mobile defense in the future.

Wingers are dicey but Matteau, Pietila and Boucher look to all have a chance to stick in the league. Adding Shinkaruk and Hartman (or something like that) would do wonders.

Goaltending doesn't matter as much. Maybe Wedgewood or Kinky will pan out, but you can always sign a guy like Fasth out of Europe. With a strong D that we seem to have, the position isn't that important.

If you look at all that and add Henrique and Fayne into the mix, NJ has a lot of good young talent. Probably the best since I've been a die hard (1999)

 

Well first of all, i didnt said or referred that our prospect pools was ranked low on HF or wtv. What i meant is that we don't have top end talent players coming our way like most teams around us or around the league. i never mentionned HF or anything thats Tri jumping to that conclusion. Can we really argue that we have a good prospects pool coming our way compared to a bunch of teams ? or even considering the guys who joined their NHL in the last 2 years

 

and for our centers... Zajac would be a good 2nd line player. We all know he's not THAT good, he needs good winger to produce he's not a Toews, Malkin, Crosby, Staal, Datsyuk, Stamkos, Getzlaf, Giroux, Tavares, Thornton, Bergeron, Kopitar etc etc (not gonna name too many cause obviously Triumph will JUMP on one particular one that i named and write a 3 feet long post throwing off what i said strictly based on that i named that guy ahead of Zajac, throwing shooting % stats at me to try to prove a point and ignore the whole sense of what i said) My whole point is... our top center is not a true top 1 center and the rest is not great compared to other teams.

 

Loktionov was a guy who couldnt even crack a spot on another team and he's suddenly one of our top guy... he's awesome and i love him. But it speaks volume when you look at it. 

 

Josefson eventhough he's ahead of his time and playing already in the NHL he's also not great and his ceiling is not great. 

 

so our center are mostly all... good 2 way players with limited ceilings. and our depth on the wings is not great in term of goal scoring either. You need goals to win.

 

theres so many other better centers (based on their probable ceiling) that are better than all of our centers too and youngster.

 

and i mean... im not saying this to bash our team but im not gonna sit here and pretend our depth on C is unreal. look around the league and you'll see that its not.


  • 0

www.SterioDesign.com

 


#469 Triumph

Triumph

    A Legend

  • Mod
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 28,736 posts

Posted 30 May 2013 - 11:58 AM

I don't know the extent to which the same principle applies to goalies, but my understanding is that stats at the AHL level are not a great indicator of NHL potential.  Parise in his AHL year didn't light it up offensively. 

 

With Campbell specifically, I obviously have not seen him play, so I can't speak to any skil set, or whether there's more to his game than his save percentage suggests (and as we all know, I'm not in love with save percentage anyway).  If you look at his individual analysis, they project him to be an 8, which HF defines as a number 1 goalie. There are 30 of them in any given year, so if anything, you should fault HF for being vague about things.  You also can't throw out draft pedigree so quickly. 

 

Otherwise, HF seems to be getting better with their individual player assessments in that they're a bit more realistic these days.  Really, they're the only game in town when it comes to significant analysis (accurate or otherwise) of prospects.

 

Stats at the AHL level are a great indicator of NHL potential.  Find me one other Parise.  I know if this goes on long enough I'll hear about how Brodeur had garbage stats in his one AHL season too (never mind that it was an expansion year and everything was screwy in 92-93).  AHL save percentage tends to correlate with NHL save percentage, AHL points tend to reflect NHL points.  Some players get much better at the NHL level.

 

I throw out draft pedigree all the time.  It means someone thought you were the best player available at that spot in a given year.  Things change.  Some players get much better, some hardly get better at all.  Especially with goaltending where the history of 1st round goaltenders is checkered at best - it's basically flipping coins.  Where a player was drafted means less the farther we get away from the draft.

 

HF's best interest is promoting everyone's players as the second coming, thus driving hits.  It's to play up how much we know about prospects versus how much we don't (and can't) know.  


  • 0

http://drivingplay.blogspot.com - The blog with three first lines
 


#470 ATLL765

ATLL765

    Assistant Coach

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,881 posts

Posted 30 May 2013 - 11:59 AM

Well first of all, i didnt said or referred that our prospect pools was ranked low on HF or wtv. What i meant is that we don't have top end talent players coming our way like most teams around us or around the league. i never mentionned HF or anything thats Tri jumping to that conclusion. Can we really argue that we have a good prospects pool coming our way compared to a bunch of teams ? or even considering the guys who joined their NHL in the last 2 years

 

and for our centers... Zajac would be a good 2nd line player. We all know he's not THAT good, he needs good winger to produce he's not a Toews, Malkin, Crosby, Staal, Datsyuk, Stamkos, Getzlaf, Giroux, Tavares, Thornton, Bergeron, Kopitar etc etc (not gonna name too many cause obviously Triumph will JUMP on one particular one that i named and write a 3 feet long post throwing off what i said strictly based on that i named that guy ahead of Zajac, throwing shooting % stats at me to try to prove a point and ignore the whole sense of what i said) My whole point is... our top center is not a true top 1 center and the rest is not great compared to other teams.

 

Loktionov was a guy who couldnt even crack a spot on another team and he's suddenly one of our top guy... he's awesome and i love him. But it speaks volume when you look at it. 

 

Josefson eventhough he's ahead of his time and playing already in the NHL he's also not great and his ceiling is not great. 

 

so our center are mostly all... good 2 way players with limited ceilings. and our depth on the wings is not great in term of goal scoring either. You need goals to win.

 

theres so many other better centers (based on their probable ceiling) that are better than all of our centers too and youngster.

 

and i mean... im not saying this to bash our team but im not gonna sit here and pretend our depth on C is unreal. look around the league and you'll see that its not.

Depth and top end talent are not the same. If you want to argue we lack high end forwards, we are missing one or two and everyone can see that, but to say we're not a deep team or don't have depth at center is just not true. We have Zajac, Henrique, Loki, Elias, all who can play at center in the top 6, after that, there's Gio, Carter, Zubes has played center, Clarky has, I'm not seeing a lack of depth there. We 4 guys who have played A LOT of center and then a few more who have still played a significant amount at that position.

Our wingers are another story after Kovy, Zubes, Clarky, there's not much for scoring wingers, if you can even count Clarky in there, he's still better suited as a 3rd line+PP time guy. So unless someone gets moved to wing, maybe Henrique will, but even if that happens, we're still 1-2 wingers short


  • 0

#471 SterioDesign

SterioDesign

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,992 posts

Posted 30 May 2013 - 12:07 PM

Depth and top end talent are not the same. If you want to argue we lack high end forwards, we are missing one or two and everyone can see that, but to say we're not a deep team or don't have depth at center is just not true. We have Zajac, Henrique, Loki, Elias, all who can play at center in the top 6, after that, there's Gio, Carter, Zubes has played center, Clarky has, I'm not seeing a lack of depth there. We 4 guys who have played A LOT of center and then a few more who have still played a significant amount at that position.

Our wingers are another story after Kovy, Zubes, Clarky, there's not much for scoring wingers, if you can even count Clarky in there, he's still better suited as a 3rd line+PP time guy. So unless someone gets moved to wing, maybe Henrique will, but even if that happens, we're still 1-2 wingers short

 

well thats true but thats 2 different thing we have depth "we're solid" as if we don't have holes at center. But its the same thing like having a 2 way player who's gonna put up average numbers but is responsible defensively and he's helping. you can't have a team of just good 2 way players putting average productions. You still need those game breaker kind of guy who can score cause at the end of the day goals will get you wins. and the best players are usually guys who can do it all and be responsible at the same time.


  • 0

www.SterioDesign.com

 


#472 Daniel

Daniel

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,441 posts

Posted 30 May 2013 - 12:38 PM

Stats at the AHL level are a great indicator of NHL potential.  Find me one other Parise.  I know if this goes on long enough I'll hear about how Brodeur had garbage stats in his one AHL season too (never mind that it was an expansion year and everything was screwy in 92-93).  AHL save percentage tends to correlate with NHL save percentage, AHL points tend to reflect NHL points.  Some players get much better at the NHL level.

 

I throw out draft pedigree all the time.  It means someone thought you were the best player available at that spot in a given year.  Things change.  Some players get much better, some hardly get better at all.  Especially with goaltending where the history of 1st round goaltenders is checkered at best - it's basically flipping coins.  Where a player was drafted means less the farther we get away from the draft.

 

HF's best interest is promoting everyone's players as the second coming, thus driving hits.  It's to play up how much we know about prospects versus how much we don't (and can't) know.  

 

Off the top of my head, I looked at Jimmy Howard's AHL stats.  His save percentage ranged between .907 and .911 over three years at age 21 to 24. 


  • 0
Posted Image
I collect spores, molds and fungus.
Hello fellow American. This you should vote me. I leave power. Good. Thank you, thank you. If you vote me, I'm hot. What? Taxes, they'll be lower... son. The Democratic vote is the right thing to do Philadelphia, so do.
How do you spot risk? How do you avoid risk? And what makes it so risky?

#473 Triumph

Triumph

    A Legend

  • Mod
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 28,736 posts

Posted 30 May 2013 - 01:15 PM

Off the top of my head, I looked at Jimmy Howard's AHL stats.  His save percentage ranged between .907 and .911 over three years at age 21 to 24. 

 

Sweet, one counter-example.  The issues with this are legion:

 

A:  Jimmy Howard's first season in the AHL was 2005-06, the season of the Endless Power Play, and save percentages were down across professional North American leagues that year.

 

B:  Nowhere did I say that players will have great save percentages in the AHL - these are rare, and the AHL tends to have lower save percentages in general.

 

C:  Save percentage has a ton of year to year variance.  It's not hard for luck to change a .910 true talent goalie (if even such a thing exists) into a .920 or .900 goalie.  The difference between these two is very large - 24 goals over 1200 shots.  

 

D:  Players sometimes improve substantially at the NHL level, but this can't be counted on.  It's not predictable.  Could Jack Campbell substantially improve at the NHL level?  Yes.  But that shouldn't be counted on.  Since being drafted, Jack Campbell hasn't put up a league average save percentage at any level.  It's just difficult to argue that that will lead to his being an NHL starter.


  • 0

http://drivingplay.blogspot.com - The blog with three first lines
 


#474 Devil Dan 56

Devil Dan 56

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,383 posts

Posted 30 May 2013 - 01:19 PM

Well first of all, i didnt said or referred that our prospect pools was ranked low on HF or wtv. What i meant is that we don't have top end talent players coming our way like most teams around us or around the league. i never mentionned HF or anything thats Tri jumping to that conclusion. Can we really argue that we have a good prospects pool coming our way compared to a bunch of teams ? or even considering the guys who joined their NHL in the last 2 years

 

and for our centers... Zajac would be a good 2nd line player. We all know he's not THAT good, he needs good winger to produce he's not a Toews, Malkin, Crosby, Staal, Datsyuk, Stamkos, Getzlaf, Giroux, Tavares, Thornton, Bergeron, Kopitar etc etc (not gonna name too many cause obviously Triumph will JUMP on one particular one that i named and write a 3 feet long post throwing off what i said strictly based on that i named that guy ahead of Zajac, throwing shooting % stats at me to try to prove a point and ignore the whole sense of what i said) My whole point is... our top center is not a true top 1 center and the rest is not great compared to other teams.

 

Loktionov was a guy who couldnt even crack a spot on another team and he's suddenly one of our top guy... he's awesome and i love him. But it speaks volume when you look at it. 

 

Josefson eventhough he's ahead of his time and playing already in the NHL he's also not great and his ceiling is not great. 

 

so our center are mostly all... good 2 way players with limited ceilings. and our depth on the wings is not great in term of goal scoring either. You need goals to win.

 

theres so many other better centers (based on their probable ceiling) that are better than all of our centers too and youngster.

 

and i mean... im not saying this to bash our team but im not gonna sit here and pretend our depth on C is unreal. look around the league and you'll see that its not.

 

 

I guess my question is what are these top end talents that all the other teams have? It was already mentioned, but depth and prospects are different. I think you really overvalue other teams' prospects. The Devils are solid (though not spectacular) up the middle, a little weak on the wing, should be very solid of defense in a few years, and they will need help from outside the organization for goaltending. As for scoring wings, it's clearly the agenda for the draft this year.

 

Additionally, you tend to say Zajac is a number 2 center. But of the 12 players you list, 7 were picked in the top 3 of the draft. These players don't just appear. I'm not sure what exactly it is that you're looking for. You're pointing out that Zajac isn't a generational talent, which we all know, but having Zajac, Loktionov, Josefsen and Carter (and the possibility of Henrique if they go that route with him) up the middle really isn't bad depth. Sure there's teams with 2 big centers, but their depth tends to drop off a cliff after that. Again, I think you are overvaluing what other teams have and not looking at how they acquired these 'game breakers' that you want.


  • 0
Official NJDevs.com Keeper of Gory Corey Schwab, Mike Peluso, Troy Crowder, Jeff Frazee, and Rich Shulmistra.
"The Devils are that zombie that takes an ax to the skull, a bullet to the temple and is set on fire … and yet keeps lumbering along to the annoyance of all the other zombies." - Puck Daddy

#475 ATLL765

ATLL765

    Assistant Coach

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,881 posts

Posted 30 May 2013 - 02:00 PM

Sweet, one counter-example.  The issues with this are legion:

 

A:  Jimmy Howard's first season in the AHL was 2005-06, the season of the Endless Power Play, and save percentages were down across professional North American leagues that year.

 

B:  Nowhere did I say that players will have great save percentages in the AHL - these are rare, and the AHL tends to have lower save percentages in general.

 

C:  Save percentage has a ton of year to year variance.  It's not hard for luck to change a .910 true talent goalie (if even such a thing exists) into a .920 or .900 goalie.  The difference between these two is very large - 24 goals over 1200 shots.  

 

D:  Players sometimes improve substantially at the NHL level, but this can't be counted on.  It's not predictable.  Could Jack Campbell substantially improve at the NHL level?  Yes.  But that shouldn't be counted on.  Since being drafted, Jack Campbell hasn't put up a league average save percentage at any level.  It's just difficult to argue that that will lead to his being an NHL starter.

So what you're suggesting is that due to the volatility of goaltender's stats, especially save %, it's best to look compare their ranking with respect to the other goalies in said league, rather than at the raw numbers? i.e. goalie puts up a .905, but ignore that and look to see how many other goalies had better or worse save % compared to that particular player and whether he is better or worse than the league average save % for that season?


  • 0

#476 Daniel

Daniel

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,441 posts

Posted 30 May 2013 - 02:14 PM

Sweet, one counter-example.  The issues with this are legion:

 

A:  Jimmy Howard's first season in the AHL was 2005-06, the season of the Endless Power Play, and save percentages were down across professional North American leagues that year.

 

B:  Nowhere did I say that players will have great save percentages in the AHL - these are rare, and the AHL tends to have lower save percentages in general.

 

C:  Save percentage has a ton of year to year variance.  It's not hard for luck to change a .910 true talent goalie (if even such a thing exists) into a .920 or .900 goalie.  The difference between these two is very large - 24 goals over 1200 shots.  

 

D:  Players sometimes improve substantially at the NHL level, but this can't be counted on.  It's not predictable.  Could Jack Campbell substantially improve at the NHL level?  Yes.  But that shouldn't be counted on.  Since being drafted, Jack Campbell hasn't put up a league average save percentage at any level.  It's just difficult to argue that that will lead to his being an NHL starter.

 

Like I said, it was off the top of my head.  If I looked around more, I'm sure there are other good NHL goalies that put up mediocre save percentages in the AHL, or more precisely, something in the range of .905.  The point is Jimmy Howard's AHL save percentage as an older player is not significantly better than Jack Campbell. 

 

I mean if you want to use HF's assessment and ranking of Jack Campbell as some kind of whipping post for HF's usefulness or lack thereof, more power to you.  But it is kind of strange to fly off the handle about a site that predicts a highly drafted 20-21 year old AHL goalie with a winning record, a 2.65 GAA and .905 save percentage to be a starting goalie in the NHL.   


  • 0
Posted Image
I collect spores, molds and fungus.
Hello fellow American. This you should vote me. I leave power. Good. Thank you, thank you. If you vote me, I'm hot. What? Taxes, they'll be lower... son. The Democratic vote is the right thing to do Philadelphia, so do.
How do you spot risk? How do you avoid risk? And what makes it so risky?

#477 Triumph

Triumph

    A Legend

  • Mod
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 28,736 posts

Posted 30 May 2013 - 02:48 PM

Like I said, it was off the top of my head.  If I looked around more, I'm sure there are other good NHL goalies that put up mediocre save percentages in the AHL, or more precisely, something in the range of .905.  The point is Jimmy Howard's AHL save percentage as an older player is not significantly better than Jack Campbell. 

 

I mean if you want to use HF's assessment and ranking of Jack Campbell as some kind of whipping post for HF's usefulness or lack thereof, more power to you.  But it is kind of strange to fly off the handle about a site that predicts a highly drafted 20-21 year old AHL goalie with a winning record, a 2.65 GAA and .905 save percentage to be a starting goalie in the NHL.   

 

Because he has two other years of subpar goaltending in the OHL also?  Let's just data snoop one year, forgetting about the other two years.  And they don't take this into account at all.  To me, his draft position has almost no relevance when you consider how many goalies in the NHL were 1st round picks.  (Not all that many - Price, Fleury, Rask, Lehtonen, Varlamov, Brodeur, Luongo/Schneider, Ward)

 

Corey Pronman is about the only person worth a damn when it comes to prospects - he understands that forwards are easier to evaluate than D, and therefore better to draft early, and goalies are just about impossible to evaluate at all.  I could pick out lots of other flaws with the site, but their opinion on goalies is the easiest.  They also weight where a player was picked more than they should.


Edited by Triumph, 30 May 2013 - 02:53 PM.

  • 0

http://drivingplay.blogspot.com - The blog with three first lines
 


#478 Daniel

Daniel

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,441 posts

Posted 30 May 2013 - 04:22 PM

Because he has two other years of subpar goaltending in the OHL also?  Let's just data snoop one year, forgetting about the other two years.  And they don't take this into account at all.  To me, his draft position has almost no relevance when you consider how many goalies in the NHL were 1st round picks.  (Not all that many - Price, Fleury, Rask, Lehtonen, Varlamov, Brodeur, Luongo/Schneider, Ward)

 

Corey Pronman is about the only person worth a damn when it comes to prospects - he understands that forwards are easier to evaluate than D, and therefore better to draft early, and goalies are just about impossible to evaluate at all.  I could pick out lots of other flaws with the site, but their opinion on goalies is the easiest.  They also weight where a player was picked more than they should.

 

That's about 1/3 of all starting goalies, which isn't that bad. 

 

They're also getting better so far as relying on draft position.  Take a look at a lot of the first round picks from last year's draft and they're not rated so high relative to other lower drafted players. 

 

Really though, I don't take HF as gospel, and never have.  It's a nice convenient way for someone that doesn't watch a ton of non-NHL hockey to get a sense of who the good prospects are.  If they over rate or under rate this or that player, which every single analyst does it's not a big deal. 


  • 0
Posted Image
I collect spores, molds and fungus.
Hello fellow American. This you should vote me. I leave power. Good. Thank you, thank you. If you vote me, I'm hot. What? Taxes, they'll be lower... son. The Democratic vote is the right thing to do Philadelphia, so do.
How do you spot risk? How do you avoid risk? And what makes it so risky?

#479 thefiestygoat

thefiestygoat

    A Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,615 posts

Posted 30 May 2013 - 06:53 PM

Future Considerations Final Top 30

 

1). D Seth Jones, Portland, WHL, 6-4, 205
2). C/RW Nathan MacKinnon, Halifax, QMJHL, 6-0, 180
3). C/LW Jonathan Drouin, Halifax, QMJHL, 5-11, 175
4). C Aleksander Barkov, Tappara, SM-liiga, 6-2, 205
5). RW Valeri Nichushkin, Traktor Chelyabinsk, KHL, 6-3, 195
6). C Elias Lindholm, Brynas, Elitserien, 6-0, 185
7). D Darnell Nurse, Sault Ste. Marie, OHL, 6-5, 195
8). C Sean Monahan, Ottawa, OHL, 6-2, 195
9). LW Hunter Shinkaruk, Medicine Hat, WHL, 5-10, 170
10). C/LW Max Domi, London, OHL, 5-10, 195

  • 0

RIP Pat Burns -- RIP Alexander Vasyunov and Lokomotiv Yaroslavl
Winner of the 2008 Sergei Brylin Award for Most Underrated Poster
Co-Winner of the 2011 Scott Bertoli Award for Best Minor League Poster, Winner of the 2012 Scott Bertoli Award


#480 SMantzas

SMantzas

    Head Coach

  • Mod
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,101 posts

Posted 30 May 2013 - 07:21 PM

On D, you can't really count on anyone other than Larsson and Merrill to be above-average NHL defensemen any time soon, or more precisely better in the long term than any of the other defensemen that are currently on the roster.  In other words, if you consider Andy Greene to be currently the best defenseman on the roster, only Larsson and Merrill have a decent to good shot at being better than him in the medium to long term.

 

Don't get me wrong, I like the other guys, especially Severson.  They're just not shoo-in improvements over what is currently there.

I guess I'm higher on Severson than most, but I could see him being better than Merrill. We don't need everyone to be all around dmen. Gelinas is very skilled offensively, Urbom looks like he could be a mainstay on the PK if he sorts some things out. A scout on HF says Scarlett "easily" has NHL potential, so you can't discount him. NJ should have a good, young and CHEAP defense the next ten years. 


  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users